2016 Postmortem
Related: About this forumSo why did SoS Clinton have a system set up outside
of approved channels and systems? Because she loved Blackberries too much? Just wondering.
Hoyt
(54,770 posts)tk2kewl
(18,133 posts)Hoyt
(54,770 posts)Last edited Sun Mar 20, 2016, 12:15 PM - Edit history (1)
for Sanders.
tk2kewl
(18,133 posts)Hoyt
(54,770 posts)I'm posting about the friggin email deal that is a bunch of trumped up crud, and you ought to know it.
libtodeath
(2,888 posts)tk2kewl
(18,133 posts)Fawke Em
(11,366 posts)I earn my living trying to explain to others why following security protocols is necessary.
The security analysts I work with all say - no matter their political leanings - that if they had done what she's accused of doing, they would have already been in jail.
That the FBI is investigating and the NSA is now leaking about it and that her server guy has been given immunity all point to the fact that it's really NOT "trumped up crud."
But you keep your head in the sand.
cherokeeprogressive
(24,853 posts)than understand it's a security risk the likes of which we've rarely seen.
The evidence is in the fact none of the sycophants will touch posts like yours.
Hoyt
(54,770 posts)information was not involved, as appears to be the case, and if nothing of that nature was compromised, it's trumped up crud. Sorry.
grasswire
(50,130 posts)No one is going to take you seriously.
Hoyt
(54,770 posts)nadinbrzezinski
(154,021 posts)I suspect Sanders, like you and most Americans do not understand the seriousness of this issue.
It took sitting down with people who once held clearances and reading emails, to realize just how serious this was, This is about country, not party. Oh and I understand why she shot herself on the foot, but this time she shot herself on the foot, metaphorically speaking of course.
Hoyt
(54,770 posts)than "most Americans." A lot of Sanders' (and Trumps') supporters seem to have that belief.
nadinbrzezinski
(154,021 posts)As far as I am concerned the entertainment will come when you have to admit that maybe you were wrong. To be correct, I do not expect you to ever do so. But if there even the smell of an indictment or Comney goes to the press because argle bargle, party loyalties, and we begin Watergate II, you know what? I will stock up on popcorn. I could give two shits what happens to the Democratic (or republican) party at this point. I could also give two shits who your party nominates for the record.
But if you think this will mean this will be good for the COUNTRY, I got a bridge to sell you. It's down by the bay. And you are not unlike the Bush people defending Bush after the WMDs... it wasn't good for the country back then either.
Hoyt
(54,770 posts)nadinbrzezinski
(154,021 posts)News abroad, see Spiegel has run interesting stories as well as Foreign policy and other high level media and talked to sources with a clue.
Also it sounds I am not a partisan. This is like the early 2000s now with hard core democrats
grasswire
(50,130 posts)He said he didn't want to be talking about it. And he said that months ago, before we know what we know now.
Dem2
(8,178 posts)That's why they use extreme examples that people associate with death.
They need to think she's the equivalent of a killer and thus her campaign must be "terminated".
It's a last gasp effort.
nadinbrzezinski
(154,021 posts)just National Security.
As to people hurt, yes, there are suspicions that HUMMINT assets have paid the ultimate price. So when you say none was hurt, you are actually wrong.
840high
(17,196 posts)Hoyt
(54,770 posts)nadinbrzezinski
(154,021 posts)this has butkis to do with Sanders at this point, So save yourself that talking point, You just look silly, and I mean it.
Hoyt
(54,770 posts)to a conspiracy by the Oligarchs to protect Clinton. It's all you've got.
nadinbrzezinski
(154,021 posts)to May... and that they gave immunity to Pagliano, this does not look good. As I told you above. I care two shits who your party nominates. I really don't care. So save that talking point.
Reminds me of the ...When did you stop beating your wife question, anyway you answer it...you are toast..
reformist2
(9,841 posts)cherokeeprogressive
(24,853 posts)libtodeath
(2,888 posts)Hoyt
(54,770 posts)Tierra_y_Libertad
(50,414 posts)cherokeeprogressive
(24,853 posts)JoePhilly
(27,787 posts)nadinbrzezinski
(154,021 posts)but given the number of agents from the FBI, that one was one they had to discount. I suspect that was discounted within ten minutes of the investigation starting, but that is actually a question they ask whenever investigations of this sort are started. Maybe it took them 15, but only due to the volume.
randome
(34,845 posts)She's a conniver, that one.
[hr][font color="blue"][center]There is nothing you can't do if you put your mind to it.
Nothing.[/center][/font][hr]
treestar
(82,383 posts)From that master of all, Obama.
Ferd Berfel
(3,687 posts)making for the Clinton Foundation while SoS?
just askin
mmonk
(52,589 posts)Hydra
(14,459 posts)And she was planning a presidential run- having everything off the books would have been a top priority so she could be free to take whatever stance she wanted at any particular time.
karynnj
(59,876 posts)At this point, every email she designated as work related has been made public, except for a few too secret. Consider that very few would EVER have been made public due to FOIA if they were always on the SD system. Nothing in them has risen to level of the story of setting up this unique private sever on which she wrote SD emails.
Note that it might have been possible had there been no controversy in her whole term that the system would never have been known. The reason it became known was they found very few emails meeting the Congressional inquiries and FOIA queries.
It seems like it took almost a year after HRC left for the SD FOIA people to realize and tell higher level people in the SD that they were missing HRC's emails. This sounds like a long time, but remember that HRC in first speaking of the server still was saying email was being captured by State.gov because she sent it to state.gov accounts. (Note that you don't have to be a genius to consider that had she actually created a state.gov account, she could have copied all her emails to that account - meaning the SD would have had a full record of everything she wrote (though obviously, unless all who were given her email were told to allow send to the SD account, the mail to her would not all be captured) In fact, she should have given the SD the email when she left -- not two years later.
Hydra
(14,459 posts)Look at the Trump problem. Bill encouraged him to run, probably to sow chaos on the GOP side and take out Jeb and others.
As usual, it got a little out of hand.
Gregorian
(23,867 posts)noiretextatique
(27,275 posts)after Obama banned him.
riderinthestorm
(23,272 posts)840high
(17,196 posts)snappyturtle
(14,656 posts)vintx
(1,748 posts)HassleCat
(6,409 posts)All this babble about "security" amounts to nothing. The real abuse consists of using her position to promote her own interests, the foundation, special favors for her contributors, etc. Of course, most people don't see it as abuse because we're numb to it.
gwheezie
(3,580 posts)If that was her purpose she would have used the government server for SOS business and had her private system set up for other business.
dana_b
(11,546 posts)JackRiddler
(24,979 posts)840high
(17,196 posts)farleftlib
(2,125 posts)UglyGreed
(7,661 posts)mmonk
(52,589 posts)tk2kewl
(18,133 posts)Apr 7, 2013 - WikiLeaks' Carter Cables II comprise 500,577 US diplomatic cables and other diplomatic communications ..... "The illegal we do immediately; the unconstitutional takes a little longer.
Dustlawyer
(10,514 posts)She doesn't want us to know her real plans, her connections, benefactors, and shady shite! I believe the she wiped her servers with more than a cloth. There is no legitimate reason why she shouldn't use the government's server for her work, and private email for personal.
UglyGreed
(7,661 posts)it is called FOIL requests. My bad
Response to mmonk (Original post)
PonyUp This message was self-deleted by its author.
NWCorona
(8,541 posts)HereSince1628
(36,063 posts)and as hypotheses go, such a constellation is the sort of possibility that requires an expensive investigation to dismiss for lack of evidence.
What a waste.
dragonfly301
(399 posts)speaktruthtopower
(800 posts)to some extent she was worried about permanent government people sympathetic to her political enemies reading her communications.
In any event it was bad judgment to use an unsecured system to send and received secret material, marked or not.
karynnj
(59,876 posts)Many have said she wanted a blackberry because that was what she was used to -- and specifically she did not want a laptop or a desk computer. Reasonable, IF IT WERE APPROVED. As SoS, there were likely hundreds of things she needed to get up to speed on. Spending time on technology might not have been a good use of her time.
However, as soon as she was given a definitive "NO", she should have worked with the NSA and tech people. Using a laptop or desk top in her office would not have been difficult. She did not have to set it up herself and she had a tech staff if things did not work. However, if seems as though she refused to take that "no" as an answer.
Why? That is where I get to "because she could". Nominating HRC as SoS, gave Obama a SoS that he could send to allied countries and it would be almost a Presidential visit given her own status as a former First Lady and her popularity and name recognition. He also got a person who has always been described as smart, organized and focused. He also tied the Clintons to him - making his interests compatible with theirs - meaning that the most likely center of Democratic opposition was stilled.
But, the cost was that he absolutely could not ask her to step down over anything. He likely did not know the full extent of the system she was using. Considering everything the President has to worry about, whether the SoS has set up her own computer network and was using it for State Department business, was likely not high on the list. Even if the issue was pushed up to him, ie in 2010, what could he do without imperiling his own Presidency and his reelection?
To me, this action and using Blumenthal, when she was told she couldn't, bespeak a level of arrogance that makes me worry that if elected, we can expect 4 years of completely avoidable investigations.
mmonk
(52,589 posts)GreydeeThos
(958 posts)What is the purpose of using a scandal cooked up entirely by Republicans on a board dedicated to Democrats?
One can only wonder why right wing talking points appear in discussions by Democrats, about Democrats.
noiretextatique
(27,275 posts)operating under rw talking points? is Obama in on it too?
GreydeeThos
(958 posts)Just because the FBI gets drawn into a Republican meme does not mean that there is any substance to it.
There was nothing when Powell did it, and there was nothing when Rice did it and there is nothing there now.
Human101948
(3,457 posts)It was a completely unnecesssary and avoidable "scandal."
frylock
(34,825 posts)Are you beginning to see a common theme here?
GreydeeThos
(958 posts)frylock
(34,825 posts)we would have never heard of the stained blue dress. If Hillary hadn't tried to circumvent FOIA requests, we would have never heard of the private mail server.
GreydeeThos
(958 posts)Just like this email deal is a hit job on Hillary Clinton.
There is a definite common theme here.
frylock
(34,825 posts)GreydeeThos
(958 posts)You have stretched the subject to include the dress.
You have stretched the subject to include Bill Clinton.
You are moving the subject to the VRWC.
You can continue until you find some point in the minutia to declare victory.
Enjoy your victory now because Bernie will not beat Hillary to the nomination.
Have a nice day.
frylock
(34,825 posts)The Clintons bring this shit on themselves, and then the rubes fall for their perpetual victimhood schtik.
uponit7771
(91,317 posts)mmonk
(52,589 posts)No propaganda is in my op.
baldguy
(36,649 posts)That's the purpose of propaganda, isn't it?
mmonk
(52,589 posts)baldguy
(36,649 posts)The inadequacies of the State Dept email system go back decades. Albright, Powell, & Rice had to deal with the same issues. The only difference is that Clinton actually did something to make the email system she was left with workable for her.
But the only SoS emails that we hear about is Clinton's. Why is that? Why is there no Congressional dog-and-pony show investigating the Bush Regime? Why don't we have a similar level of outrage about Powell's emails leading up to 9-11? Or about Rice's emails about the invasion of Iraq?
It couldn't be because you don't believe there were no crimes committed then, is it? But then, you're happy to allow the RW propaganda machine to lead you around by the nose.
mmonk
(52,589 posts)They did use private emails.
baldguy
(36,649 posts)Classified too. Tsk tsk tsk.
And lookie here:
FBI contacts Colin Powell as part of email probe
But those crimes aren't important - - Bernie's got nomination to win!
Fawke Em
(11,366 posts)They did not have private SERVERS, and hackable ones, at that.
Yes, they used their personal email from time to time, but that is not the same thing as setting up a server in their homes and using it exclusively.
baldguy
(36,649 posts)Still no answer as to why Clinton inadvertently sending classified emails is the bombshell that will get her indicted & sent to prison - in spite of the fact that she's not the target of any investigation of any agency at any level - but Powell & Rice doing the exact same thing for the exact same reasons doesn't even rise a level of being acknowledged by the RW propaganda machine.
Because what's driving this story is the RW propaganda machine. That this dead horse is still being flogged by Berniestas speaks volumes.
mmonk
(52,589 posts)baldguy
(36,649 posts)that is literally applied to no one else on the planet.
And you don't even begin to try and justify it.
mmonk
(52,589 posts)baldguy
(36,649 posts)Where were the endlessly repeated demands for Trumps emails for the multiple lawsuits against him, or Christies for the bridge closing, or the outrage for Jeb for the destruction of his email server after he left the Governor's office?
They don't exist. The RW propaganda machine has deemed that only Clinton should be subject to such close scrutiny. And you're more than happy to follow their orders.
One of the 99
(2,280 posts)Benghazi and the emails are GOP invented scandals.
RufusTFirefly
(8,812 posts)... but these are real scandals. The inventor of the email scandal is Hillary Clinton's obsessive secrecy and aversion to transparency. In fairness to Secretary Clinton, the inventor of the Benghazi scandal is probably the CIA. But the State Dept. under Clinton made things much worse.
One of the 99
(2,280 posts)Broward
(1,976 posts)politicians and policies.
Gregorian
(23,867 posts)Fuddnik
(8,846 posts)The Bush Administration did this quite well, conducting under the radar, and possibly illegal behavior on personal laptops and e-mail.
What was she hoping to hide? What was in the 30,000 deleted e-mails?
AgerolanAmerican
(1,000 posts)What disturbs me the most is that there really is no solid foundation for ruling out the possibility that she was selling state secrets and getting paid through the Clinton Foundation. A server compromised in a known way as a means of providing access would be an effective method of creating plausible deniability.
Whatever it is, there's something that is seen as heavy enough to grant the server admin immunity to talk about. I just don't see that happening absent a substantial crime.
KeepItReal
(7,769 posts)That's one reason. Why the NSA said no is not clear...maybe because she travels overseas too much and the cellular networks she'd roam on could be compromised.
I also have to blame POTUS and/or Rahm as Chief of Staff for not reigning in her use of personal email when it first arose.
Either way, it was a bad decision.
DCBob
(24,689 posts)I might have done the same if I were her given the circumstances.
Fawke Em
(11,366 posts)Nice to know.
DCBob
(24,689 posts)Apparently Hillary's IT guy set it up securely since the logs appear to show the server was not hacked.
840high
(17,196 posts)libdem4life
(13,877 posts)Not. As IT professionals, who are not generally considered ignorant and blind, have put it, a Non-HRC person could/would be in jail. I'm assuming you are not one of them.
DCBob
(24,689 posts)BTW, I am an IT professional.
libdem4life
(13,877 posts)DemocracyDirect
(708 posts)Recursion
(56,582 posts)to have a Blackberry. The way people are getting the Blackberry angle 180 degrees wrong is kind of exasperating.
karynnj
(59,876 posts)The fact is she was told she could NOT use a blackberry - so, no, she was not always allowed to do so for work. (Obviously, if she wanted a blackberry for personal calls, no one would have cared.)
Not to mention, if that was the SOLE reason -- and it is pretty lame, she could have insured that the SD had all her email. Imagine, she, first, had her tech person set up TWO accounts for her on her server - one for work, one for business. Then had the tech person, move all her incoming and outgoing email to a State.Gov account - say at the end of every week or month.
That would have assured that the FOIA requests and the Congressional inquiries had everything they needed. Had that happened, there likely never would have been any public knowledge that she did this. Rules could be written to assure that no one else did the same - though this is such a strange thing to do that I doubt any future SoS would have thought to do so.
I resent what she did because her selfish action could ultimately cast shadows on the reputations of Obama and Kerry, both better people than the Clintons.
Trust Buster
(7,299 posts)Last edited Sun Mar 20, 2016, 04:44 PM - Edit history (1)
Powell and Rice also had problems with the archaic computer system at State. Our government servers get hacked on a daily basis. You can blame Hillary solely for political reasons but, it's pretty apparent that are government is still not prepared for this digital age.
karynnj
(59,876 posts)Powell is credited with greatly improving the computer system. Clinton just left the system -- and did not bother to insure that teh SD got the emails that they should have always had in a reasonably timely way. Had she given the SD, her incoming and outgoing work email - say on a monthly basis, she would STILL be using her server, but there would have been no problem in getting the info for FOIA requests.
In doing what she did, she herself stonewalled the Congress and others and made it impossible for the SD to be as forthcoming as they might have wanted when she was gone -- they did not have the information.
baldguy
(36,649 posts)The fact that it's been taken up so readily by Sanders supporters speaks volumes.
DemocratSinceBirth
(100,013 posts)There is saying for this thread that includes a sex act and a chicken but I won't repeat it in this forum because it's vulgar and alertable.
If anybody wants to know the saying they can send me a private message.
PEACE
DSB
840high
(17,196 posts)Fawke Em
(11,366 posts)Yes - but only those with outward-facing servers.
Servers like SIPRnet and JWICS do NOT face out. You cannot email from them. They are insular and very protected. And they are NOT hacked. You know what's kept there? National security secrets. The OPM's server, for example, doesn't house national security secrets. It's sad that the employees had their information stolen, but the information the hackers garnered doesn't put the nation at risk.
You know what's been found on Hillary's server? Emails containing information that had been physically copied (typed up) from SIPRnet and sent, unencrypted, to Hillary on a server that didn't even use a dual authentication VPN and could be pinged directly from the Internet.
Sorry, but the "the government is hacked all the time" meme needs to die. Our government does not keep the nation's secrets on servers that can be hacked with the exception of, well, Hillary Clinton.
Trust Buster
(7,299 posts)FlatBaroque
(3,160 posts)the last thing you want is some pesky oversight.
RiverLover
(7,830 posts)Which is why, as soon as she left the office of SoS, they made having a private server for govt business illegal.
Prior to her, no one ever imagined someone would do such a thing.
But then, no one prior to her was accepting million$ from people they were granting favors for as SoS & had such things to hide. Too bad she didn't seem to care about putting the US in danger in the process, with such a lousy system that an unemployed painter in Eastern Europe could hack into it via Blumenthal.
A guy Obama didn't even know she was getting intel from. Jeezus, people are being so gullible about her. It would be easier to believe the made for TV version, but that is so far from reality.
cherokeeprogressive
(24,853 posts)The elites don't care about anything but keeping up with the other elites.
Whatever wrong a fellow elite gets away with becomes a "precedent" other elites aspire to and something elite sycophants readily excuse like a puppy excuses being beaten if you toss it some kind of meaningless treat.
Response to cherokeeprogressive (Reply #39)
PonyUp This message was self-deleted by its author.
LexVegas
(6,483 posts)polly7
(20,582 posts)peace13
(11,076 posts)....because it is easier to run from sniper fire with a Blackberry.
mmonk
(52,589 posts)w4rma
(31,700 posts)This server was set up to do exactly what it accomplished. It was designed so that no records would exist at the State Department, so that when Freedom of Information Act requests were filed there, the answer would be 'We have no records'.
Autumn
(45,942 posts)mmonk
(52,589 posts)pdsimdars
(6,007 posts)They think they are special.
Attorney in Texas
(3,373 posts)Zorra
(27,670 posts)outside the boundaries of her license, duties, and responsibilities of her position as SOS, and outside the scrutiny approved state channels and systems.
grasswire
(50,130 posts)Also outside the view of POTUS.
I cannot understand why the NSA (who had to see her extra-lawful communications) did not inform POTUS. Or perhaps they did, and he is playing a dimensional chess game on her. She dissed him and betrayed him (and is now hugging him) and that makes me maddest of all.
FlatBaroque
(3,160 posts)libdem4life
(13,877 posts)There are three others, Huma Abedin being one, who could take a hard fall for this. No one is dumb here. They were pre-meditated get arounds, and as they now begin to lead into the Foundation, and Slick Willy returns to "fundraise", well, the Democrats may live in The River of Denial aka Benghazi-farce, but the Republicans are waiting in the Gotcha mode.
We nominate her at our peril. Bill's no longer the brightest bulb. All of Trump's baggage is pretty much out there and he skips right over it. Her past baggage, as well. This is far newer, pay to play, enormous wealth and the FBI is not the vast Right Wing Conspiracy.
grasswire
(50,130 posts)potential of Watergate-style blowup.
pansypoo53219
(21,621 posts)Response to mmonk (Original post)
Name removed Message auto-removed
jalan48
(14,266 posts)nadinbrzezinski
(154,021 posts)the problem is that this was a self inflicted wound. And that is just the most obvious answer... there are a panoply of others.
mmonk
(52,589 posts)grasswire
(50,130 posts)Untold riches await the Clintons. The military power to depose any world leader and re-shape the whole of the world. Rivers of gold flowing into the pockets of cronies. Wealth without measure.
Worth fighting for, if you're a Clinton.
nadinbrzezinski
(154,021 posts)I do not believe she is the source of all evil, or Sauron... this was set to avoid the kind of 1990s witch hunt, and well. self inflicted would... if or rather when this explodes though, the only ones to suffer will be the country. The party will as well, but that is truly incidental to me. This scandal may very well give the presidency to Trump.
History will not be kind to the Clintons tough.
DemocracyDirect
(708 posts)But the future will be soft and shiny.
nadinbrzezinski
(154,021 posts)And the stuff of nightmares involves pain
840high
(17,196 posts)OZi
(155 posts)Nothing to see here folks. Move along.